discord_timeout_member

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

The description adds valuable behavioral detail beyond annotations: it explains what happens to the member during timeout (cannot send messages, react, speak) and how timeout can be removed early. Annotations indicate idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, which are consistent. The description enhances understanding of the tool's effects.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is extremely concise: two sentences that cover purpose, behavior, special values, limits, and permissions. Every sentence adds value, and the most critical information is front-loaded. No wasted words.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential aspects: what the tool does, how to use it, constraints, and permissions. It does not mention return values or error handling, but these are less critical for a simple mutation. It is sufficiently complete for the agent to use correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema has 100% parameter description coverage, and the description adds significant extra meaning: it explains the special case of duration_minutes=0 to clear timeout, reinforces the maximum duration (28 days), and clarifies the reason parameter's role in the audit log. This goes well beyond the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose: muting a member for a set duration (Discord 'timeout'). It specifies the exact actions prevented (send messages, react, speak) and distinguishes timeout from other moderation actions like ban or kick, which are sibling tools.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides clear usage context: to timeout a member or remove an active timeout using duration_minutes=0. It also mentions the required permission (Moderate Members). However, it does not explicitly compare to alternatives or state when not to use, which would strengthen guidance further.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.